Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Mike HudsonChief Operations Officer
NOAA/National Weather Service Central Region Headquarters
Local Decision Support Services During a
Major Flood Event - Successes Gained and
Lessons Learned
• Glacial Lake Agassiz
• Silty lakebed soils
• “Valley” is misleading
• Overland Flooding
• 1 foot slope every mile
• Red River flows North
Red River Valley OverviewCanadian Providences
North Dakota
Minnesota
South Dakota
Devil’s
Lake
Flow
Sheyenne River
Oslo
Grand Forks
Fargo
Flood event review
• Record flooding occurred on the Red River at
Fargo with crest of 40.82‟ on March 28
• Antecedent conditions prime for high flood
potential
• Outlooks highlighted likelihood of major
flooding, and ultimately of record flooding,
well in advance
Decision Support Services
3/24 -4/3; 4/13-16: On-site support at Fargo/Moorhead and Minnesota SEOC
3/26-31: On-site at SD SEOC
Key Events
4/15-4/16: Second Crest On-site support ends at Fargo/Moorhead and scales back at MN SEOC.
1/9/09-3/15/09: WFO FGF and the NCRFC engaged with state/local EM’s and congressionals about RRN flood potential
MARCH APRIL
3/25-5/1: On-site support at ND SEOC (aft 4/20: mornings only)
1 115 15 1
3/20-4/6: Daily DHS/FEMA/NOC briefings from NWS Central Region Headquarters
Key Briefing on January 8, 2009 Addressed Significant Threat for Major Flooding
• Focus on Current Conditions in the
Red River Valley
• Attendees: NWS, USACE,
Minnesota DNR, USGS, FEMA,
NDSWC, Manitoba Water
Resources, Emergency Managers,
Watershed Districts
• As a result, NCRFC issued an early
suite of probabilistic forecasts for
the Red River Valley on January
9th, 2009
Top 5 Climate Years19791969196519971975
2009 Crest 40.8 ft
1897 Record Flood 40.1 ft
Fargo January 14 - April 30
Large ShiftKey Indicator of Risk
Fargo flood probability outlook
• 60% chance of reaching 38 feet
• 1 out of 4 chance of eclipsing the flood of record!!
Issued March 11, 2009
Multi-tiered support
• On-site support provided at three State
Emergency Operations Centers (SEOC)
– North Dakota SEOC staffed by WFO Bismarck from
3/25 to 4/17, and some mornings from 4/20 to 5/8.
– Minnesota SEOC staffed by WFO Chanhassen from
3/24 to 4/3, and most mornings from 4/6 to 4/15
– South Dakota SEOC staffed by WFO Sioux Falls
from 3/26 to 3/29
Multi-tiered support
• On-site support to FEMA Region VIII in Denver
– Staffed by WFO Boulder from 3/24 – 3/30.
• On-site support to Fargo/Cass County EOCs
and to Moorhead/Clay County EOC
– Staffed 3/23 – 4/4 by WFO Grand Forks and Central
Region Headquarters
– Staffed 4/13 – 4/16 by WFO Grand Forks and WFO
Grand Rapids
Regional HQ role
• Central Region ROC (Regional Operations
Center) activated for nearly a month
• Roles and responsibilities:
– The “grand conductor” of DSS missions
– Coordinate activities and message from all on-site DSS teams
– Brief Headquarters and NOAA staff on evolving situation
– Document information
– Contingency planning
Why the Fargo focus?
• Social Impact
• First in 12 years to mirror magnitude of „97 flood
• ~16 to 22% of the State‟s population in Fargo
• Economic Impact
• Fargo represents ~30% of State‟s economy
• Communications and Transportation
• Hub for much of the State‟s telecommunications
• I-94/I-29 & railroads
Typical Fargo/Moorhead
schedule
– 7:00 am - Fargo city staff meeting @ City Hall
– 8:00 am - Fargo City Hall open meeting and press
conference
– 9:30 am - Fargo/Cass County EOC briefing
– 10:00 am - Moorhead, MN EOC briefing
– 11:00 am - Moorhead press conference
– NOON - Grand Forks Media conference call
– 1:00 pm - Fargo city staff meeting @ City Hall
– 2:00 pm - Fargo City Hall public mtg/press conf.
– 2:30 pm - Fargo/Cass County EOC briefing
– 6:00 pm - Moorhead, MN EOC briefing
– 9:00 pm - Fargo/Cass County EOC briefing
What was our mission?
• NWS requested to attend
numerous meetings/briefings
• Focus on Decision Support of
observations and WFO/NCRFC
forecasts
• Utilization of NOAA web
resources
• Interpretation of probabilities
• Being the purveyor of the
“uncertain”
What was our role?
• What did Decision Support mean to
Fargo/Moorhead officials?
• We were there – before, during and after
the BIG events
• “We” are “They” – a part of the community
of locals and veterans of the flood fight
• Communications and Trust – be open and
honest
• TEAMWORK!!
Daily meetings in Fargo
Successes
• Presence at various city and county “neighborhood” meetings
– Being a part of the team
– “Being there” went a long ways towards removing doubt
• Early acceptance into the “team” on-site
• Up close with discussions amongst all the Federal agencies involved
– Agencies (USACE, USGS, DNRs, Border Patrol, Red Cross, FEMA, State EMAs, etc.)
– Political figures (Governors, Senators, Representatives)
Successes
• Excellent interagency collaboration involving federal, state and local government officials
– Face-to-face work in Fargo (and at North Central River Forecast Center) with USACE, FEMA, USGS and private engineering firm
– Border Patrol use of UAS aircraft for snow/ice measurements
• Strong internal collaboration
– Unprecedented use of extended precipitation and temperature forecasts into river models
• Advancements in technology
UAV image from Oslo, ND
Water was 13 miles wide upstream of Oslo
Other Improvements
Technological improvements yielded much better data from which NWS and officials could make better decisions
• River gage data latency ~ 2 seconds
• Average DCP data refresh 1 hour
• National network ~ 13,800 locations
• Daily data values processed ~2.5M
• Multiple communication networks
• Extensive access to collab. agencies
• Extensive distribution via Internet
2009 – Fargo
• River gage data latency ~ 12 minutes
• Average DCP data refresh 4 hours
• National network ~6000 locations
• Daily data values processed ~400K
• Slow, limited communication links
• Limited access to collab. agencies
• Infancy of Internet
1997 – Grand Forks
Areas to improve• Successful decision support services require
effective information management
– Science/technology advances improved forecast process
– Data is interoperable, accessible, reliable and from all available sources
– Users depend on expert interpretation and reinforcement for effective decision making
• The message we intend to communicate is not always conveyed effectively
– Terminology and graphics can create confusion
• Outlook vs. Forecast
• Probabilistic vs. deterministic
Summary
• Various NOAA teams were deployed to various
state/Federal locations to support the Red River
flood effort
– Two teams on-site in Fargo/Moorhead, one for
each crest
• On-site Decision Support activities were critical
to several key partners during the flood fight
• NOAA/NWS Forecast Offices, NCRFC, and on-site
Decision Support Specialists contributed greatly
to hazard mitigation during the Flood of 2009
Questions?
Probabilistic flood forecast for Fargo Spring 2010, issued 1/4/10
Large ShiftKey Indicator
of Risk
2009 Crest 40.8 ft
1897 Record Flood 40.1 ft